You obviously missed the cynicism of my post. I live in FL so I have not had the honor of visiting Fenway. Someday hopefully. As far as spending my hard earned money, I purchase MLB Extra Innings and have a glut of RS stuff.

Actually I got your cynicism...as a response to my post...but the point I was making is that whether they paid for free agents or not this offseason ticket prices were not about to go down...so it's good that they at least trying to improve the product and fix the chemistry in that clubhouse at the same time.

Considering the free agent crop this offseason they've done a decent job retooling for 2013...they should definitely be more competitive than last year and hopefully will stay in the race into the dog days of summer. They've got their work cut out for them considering the division competition.

'Drew's damaged goods and none of previous employers wanted anything to do with him.

Also, Drew's damaged goods is a contraction for "Drew is damaged goods".

"Drew is injury"? What does that mean? This thread has permanent grammatical damage.

While I understand your anger from pride and prejudice, your captious efforts are juvenile. In your own cut and paste, you correctly copied "Drew's", which has an apostrophe for posssessive "Drew's injury".'

Folks, I hope some of you were sharp enough to pick up on the joke here. Our resident expert on everything apparently missed it.

'Drew's damaged goods and none of previous employers wanted anything to do with him.

Also, Drew's damaged goods is a contraction for "Drew is damaged goods".

"Drew is injury"? What does that mean? This thread has permanent grammatical damage.

While I understand your anger from pride and prejudice, your captious efforts are juvenile. In your own cut and paste, you correctly copied "Drew's", which has an apostrophe for posssessive "Drew's injury".'

Folks, I hope some of you were sharp enough to pick up on the joke here. Our resident expert on everything apparently missed it.

'Drew's damaged goods and none of previous employers wanted anything to do with him.

Also, Drew's damaged goods is a contraction for "Drew is damaged goods".

"Drew is injury"? What does that mean? This thread has permanent grammatical damage.

While I understand your anger from pride and prejudice, your captious efforts are juvenile. In your own cut and paste, you correctly copied "Drew's", which has an apostrophe for posssessive "Drew's injury".'

Folks, I hope some of you were sharp enough to pick up on the joke here. Our resident expert on everything apparently missed it.

Considering we spent more on free agency (at a per season cost) this winter than ever before, doesn't it make you wonder why?

1) This is one of the worst free agent classes in memory.

2) We finished in last place last year and are trying to appear competitive by signing a bunch of guys from a weak class.

It's a poor plan: face the truth.

It's a poor plan, but what other plan was there?

There was NO point in going into 2013 with what finished 2012 if the FO wanted to even half-fill the seats. Something had to be done.

It was a poor FA class and yes, the Sox spent too much money on FA's for what they got, but the owners set the price and then have to pay it.

The Sox prospects appear to be valuable enough for rebuilding teams to want them - so it only follows that since the Sox are rebuilding they'd want to keep them. Yes, they could possibly have been traded in a 5 or 6 for one deal for someone like Stanton but that mortgages the future.

These same prospects are a year away (at best) from being able to contribute at the ML level.

As was said in "Argo", "This is the best bad plan we've got", and I wholly support it. This is called Planning for the Future. It's looking at your assets and your liabilities and putting a temporary band-aid on the wound until the permanent repairs are available.

Like every plan, either it will work or it won't. If it works I see the Sox winning ~85 games this year and finishing 3rd or 4th, but in doing so setting themselves up to be in the same position the Yankees were in when Jeter, Williams, etc. were coming into their prime.

If it doesn't work... well, I don't want to think about that, but it gets dealt with when it happens. But I think overall it's a good strategy.

Drew's injury, which came on a slide to the plate, was gruesome. His foot bent at an awkward angle, causing him to break his fibula and suffer ligament damage. He had a plate attached to the bone as part of the surgery.

"Drew is injury"? What does that mean? This thread has permanent grammatical damage.

Folks, raging jealousy deludes many a mental midget. Three regular drive-by posters are having a circle jerk over what they think is an error in grammar. If you look on "Extra Innings", you will see that I cut and pasted this comment from whoever wrote it for Extra Innings. In addition, If you read Devil's captious comment, you will see that he has zero reading comprehension in addition to be exposed as a fool for thinking I was the author of that report. This thread was about some idiot wanting "evidence of permanent damage". Of course, the evidence is irrefutable that he does have permanent medical damage.

The jokes on the three circle jerkers intoxicated with attempting to cast spitballs;)

Now, let's take a look at a word from the actual speech of the greatest intellectual frauds in American history:

Drew's injury, which came on a slide to the plate, was gruesome. His foot bent at an awkward angle, causing him to break his fibula and suffer ligament damage. He had a plate attached to the bone as part of the surgery.

"Drew is injury"? What does that mean? This thread has permanent grammatical damage.

Folks, raging jealousy deludes many a mental midget. Three regular drive-by posters are having a circle jerk over what they think is an error in grammar. If you look on "Extra Innings", you will see that I cut and pasted this comment from whoever wrote it for Extra Innings. In addition, If you read Devil's captious comment, you will see that he has zero reading comprehension in addition to be exposed as a fool for thinking I was the author of that report. This thread was about some idiot wanting "evidence of permanent damage". Of course, the evidence is irrefutable that he does have permanent medical damage.

The jokes on the three circle jerkers intoxicated with attempting to cast spitballs;)

Now, let's take a look at a word from the actual speech of the greatest intellectual frauds in American history:

"Corspeman"

Nothing else needs to be stated.

Softy, I personally could give a hoot about grammar errors on a Red Sox message board...however, I do refute your claim that Drew's ankle is permanently damaged based solely on a paragraph written by a fellow message board poster.

How about you reach into your little bag of tricks and provide a weblink to the proclamation by a medical staff or individual that Drew is for all intents and purposes, crippled.

What exactly does it mean that he had a plate attached to the bone during surgery?Can you please specify whether the plate is actually holding the ankle together or just there to support the healing process during recovery? Do you have any proof that the plate still resides in him or was it removed at some point during recovery??

I am not critcizing you, I am just trying to get some other type of evidence that the Sox invested in a player who is likely to break down the first time he slides into second base, if you ascertains are accurate.

Considering we spent more on free agency (at a per season cost) this winter than ever before, doesn't it make you wonder why?

1) This is one of the worst free agent classes in memory.

2) We finished in last place last year and are trying to appear competitive by signing a bunch of guys from a weak class.

It's a poor plan: face the truth.

It's a poor plan, but what other plan was there?

I have already mentioned several plans better than the "halfway plan" Ben adopted.

In short, sign players a year or two younger who would be in the middle of their prime in 2014-2015 and not end of prime or past prime. (I mentioned B McCarthy.) Or, sign one big named FA to 5 years (not my choice, but better than the halfway plan) and at least have his value beyong 2013. Even in decline due to age, a superstar will be better than what we have now. (My choice for this plan was A Sanchez.)

There was NO point in going into 2013 with what finished 2012 if the FO wanted to even half-fill the seats. Something had to be done.

I have never said do nothing. We could have made deals and signings that made us better in 2013, but more importantly set us up better for 2014 and beyond. None of the moves we made this winter will clearly help us in 2014 and on.

It was a poor FA class and yes, the Sox spent too much money on FA's for what they got, but the owners set the price and then have to pay it.

No. You don't have to pay. You can pass.

You don't choose the worst FA class to sign a record amount of FAs.

The Sox prospects appear to be valuable enough for rebuilding teams to want them - so it only follows that since the Sox are rebuilding they'd want to keep them. Yes, they could possibly have been traded in a 5 or 6 for one deal for someone like Stanton but that mortgages the future.

I was fine with not dealing any top prospects, but if we are indeed trying to set ourselves up for these kids to contribute in 2014 and beyond, why not plan our signings and deals accordingly?

These same prospects are a year away (at best) from being able to contribute at the ML level.

And who of our signings will complement these kids?

As was said in "Argo", "This is the best bad plan we've got", and I wholly support it. This is called Planning for the Future. It's looking at your assets and your liabilities and putting a temporary band-aid on the wound until the permanent repairs are available.

Planning for the future? Who? What? Where? When? Our 3 years deals were jokes. Our 1 year deals were mostly wastes of money that could have been spent on players who could have helped us beyond 2013.

Like every plan, either it will work or it won't. If it works I see the Sox winning ~85 games this year and finishing 3rd or 4th, but in doing so setting themselves up to be in the same position the Yankees were in when Jeter, Williams, etc. were coming into their prime.

We have not set ourselves up for anything but failure and further failures.

If it doesn't work... well, I don't want to think about that, but it gets dealt with when it happens.

Ellen 08 Dec 2011, 15:31 I had pins & a plate in my ankle after an auto accident in 1995; the lower end of the fibula was in several small pieces. The swelling lasted for weeks if not months. Afterwards I would have unpredictable lockups in my ankle where I could not move w/o extreme pain, and also persistent low-grade aching type pain. I eventually ran afterwards (would just took a couple of ex-strength Excedrins 15 mins prior to the run) but that was probably a mistake. Finally about 2-3 yrs ago went on a run and due to extreme pain, I had to be helped off the trail, pain not subsiding as it usually would, until I iced it for 1/2 hr. I saw an orthopedic surgeon and had an arthroscopic debridement which has helped greatly but now am faced with the prospect of an imminent fusion or replacement if I return to running and break through the tiny amount of remaining cartilage which has deteriorated in an accelerated fashion over the years due to the trauma

This is a case study. While no cases are the same, no once can deny that what happened to Drew is permanent structural damage because of age and the mortality of human tissue. Had he been younger, the extent of the permanent damage to the ligament and the bone would be mitigated.

Frankly, if it weren't for the 10 million, Drew would not be playing baseball at all because he is going to complicate and do further damage to his ankle. Does that mean he can't hit in Fenway? No, but it does means he has no chance of being a full season starting SS and fielding well (not based on scored errors or fielding %, based on range and agility to get the total number of putouts required in the tipping points of individual games), at the 2nd most important fielding position, SS.

Then I guess Drew playing virtually every game with the A's after his trade from Arizona must be considered a miracle then? How could someone in that my pain and agony continue to play in 39 consecutive games?

Also, I would imagine that one of the first parts of his physical with the Sox would have been to have the ankle x-rayed, with a medical opinion of Drew's ankle's prognosis provided by the doctor who performed the surgery.

Lastly, I find it interesting that you provided documenation of 'Ellen the runner'...as your documentation that Drew is permanently damaged...needless to say I hardly expect that treatments and recovery procedures would vary greatly between "Ellen the runner' and a major league athlete.

Tell Ellen I appreciate her feedback, but I'd still prefer this documentation from a medical professional...maybe his surgeon commented that he was permanently damaged...now that comment I would take to the bank.

They could have gone the big splash route again and signed Hamilton and Greinke for $275 million.

They could have traded top prospects for guys like Dickey.

Also, with regard to the weak free agent class that you keep referencing, there is no guarantee that the free agent classes of 2014-2015 will be better. Or is there?

OK. There may be one worse plan, but at least signing Hamilton and Greinke would have made us better in 2014, 2015 and probably beyond at about the same yearly cost as Victorino, Dempster, Naps and Drew.